[rfc-i] Data point [Re: Fwd:I-D ACTION:draft-hoffman-utf8-rfcs-03.txt]

Joe Touch touch at ISI.EDU
Tue Oct 7 13:05:52 PDT 2008

Hash: SHA1

Julian Reschke wrote:
>> No it doesn't. My browser does not understand or honor FFs.

Repeat - my browser doesn't understand or honor FFs.

You can program my browser to have a CSS that does so, but I have to
visit the right site for that to work.

What I cannot do is open a .utf8 file and have it work.

Yes, I like Word for writing RFCs, but I don't think it's reasonable to
require users to purchase it to read/print them properly.

I don't think it's reasonable to require users to read/print files that
are not the definitive version (i.e., other than the .utf8); if the file
that they save/view/print isn't the .utf8, then we are talking about
requiring different files for different purposes.

I see neither of these as a step forward.

>>> but that printing isn't. That's the same for both ASCII and
>>> UTF-8. I personally don't care at all. I don't print things anymore.
>> No it's not the same for ASCII. I can view and print and preserve page
>> boundaries in both in Wordpad, which is free on Windows.
> I just tried and it doesn't work. What steps do I need to follow to get
> there?

Save the text-only version. Open in Wordpad. That's it.

>>> For ASCII, you seem to have found a solution that works for you on
>>> Windows. It's definitely not obvious for people who don't know already.
>> There are only two editors that come with Windows - Notepad and Wordpad.
>> If one doesn't work, and you try the other, that's not exactly obscure.
> I just tried it and it didn't work for me. Maybe my printing defaults
> are different -- the default layout I get is to narrow (lines break that
> shouldn't) and not long enough (footers appear on the next side).

Setup the page for letter (i.e., US letter). That might be the issue.

When you print, you should be able to set something like "reduce to
printed page", which will shrink the output slightly and print it on A4.

>>> I have told you about another one that will work both for ASCII and
>>> UTF-8. How many ways do we need?
>> You've shown me a way that works only if I use commercial software.
> Firefox?
> Why can't we just rely on a format and software that's the base of the
> WWW. It *does* work.

So now you're not proposing UTF-8; you're proposing .html with UTF-8 and
a corresponding .css as the standard format. That's beyond what
draft-hoffman is proposing, and beyond what is being considered, AFAICT.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list